Whether you like them or not,Deuteronomy 31:25-29 and Jeremiah 8:8-9 are there right in the Bible to prove that the Bible is corrupted into a lie by its keepers!

It is very interesting to know that even you fredifreeloadercall the Bible a lie by quoting your own words: 'this is it with you people, one lie just leads to another, and you soon become enmeshed in deceit'!

Deceit? What deceit? I am quoting the verses of your own Bible and you call them the deceit!

according to you, (and you have now repeated it twice) these verses from deuteronomy 31: 25-29prove that the bible has been corrupted into a lie. here are the verses:

25 he gave this command to the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD : 26 "Take this Book of the Law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God. There it will remain as a witness against you. 27 For I know how rebellious and stiff-necked you are. If you have been rebellious against the LORD while I am still alive and with you, how much more will you rebel after I die! 28 Assemble before me all the elders of your tribes and all your officials, so that I can speak these words in their hearing and call heaven and earth to testify against them. 29 For I know that after my death you are sure to become utterly corrupt and to turn from the way I have commanded you. In days to come, disaster will fall upon you because you will do evil in the sight of the LORD and provoke him to anger by what your hands have made."

the only time the word "corrupt" occurs is in v. 29, and it says the children of israel would become corrupt. there is nothing here to indicate any corruption in the Word of God. in fact the verses clearly point to its preservation, because it says that the Holy Word would be kept to stand as a witness against them in their evil. and yet you claim it is proof that the Holy Word has been corrupted. what a lie!

you have obviously copied all this muck straight off some evil, antichrist website, without even checking anything youve read on it

Edited by fredifreeloader

for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16

Regarding Abby's degrading remarks about the Bible - and the junk he posted from the anti-Christian website. Any 5th grade Sunday School student would be able to resolve any so-called conflicts that are reported to exist. Just look up the verses for yourself. For instance, the silly one where Abby says that Jesus commanded baptism and Paul refutes that - what an outrageous lie. Paul was talking about party-spirit (I'm following this guy, you're following that guy) - never did Paul refute baptism.

This is just an example of Abby's silly polemics and inability to engage in any exchange of ideas demanding an IQ of 70 or above.

The contradictions of the Bible have proven that the crucifixion of Jesus is a hoax:

Comment:No they don't.

Originally posted by AbRah2006

(1)Christ was crucified at the third hour Mark 15:25 Christ was not crucified until the sixth hour John 19:14,15

Answer:Both Gospel writers are correct.The difficulty is answered when you realize that each Gospel writer used a different time system.John follows the Roman time system while Mark follows the Jewish time system.

According to Roman time, the day ran from midnight to midnight.The Jewish 24 hour period began in the evening at 6PM and the morning of that day began at 6AM.Therefore, when Mark asserts that at the third hour Christ was crucified, this was about 9AM.John stated that Christ's trial was about the sixth hour.This would place the trial before the crucifixion and this would not negate any testimony of the Gospel writers.This fits with John's other references to time.For example, he speaks about Jesus being weary from His journey from His trip from Judea to Samaria at the "sixth hour" and asking fo r water from the woman at the well.Considering the length of his trip, his weariness, and the normal evening time when people come to the well to drink and to water their animals, this fits better with 6PM, which is "the sixth hour" of the night by Roman time reckoning.The same is true of John's reference to the tenth hour in John 1:39, which would be 10AM, a more likely time to be out preaching than 4AM.

Originally posted by AbRah2006

(2)Christ was to be three days and three nights in the grave Matt 12:40Christ was but two days and two nights in the grave Mark 15:25,42,44,45,46; 16:9

Answer:Matt 12:40, For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Mark 15: 25 Now it was the third hour, and they crucified Him.

Mark 15: 42 Now when evening had come, because it was the Preparation Day, that is, the day before the Sabbath, 43 Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent council member, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, coming and taking courage, went in to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. 44 Pilate marveled that He was already dead; and summoning the centurion, he asked him if He had been dead for some time. 45 So when he found out from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph. 46 Then he bought fine linen, took Him down, and wrapped Him in the linen. And he laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out of the rock, and rolled a stone against the door of the tomb.

Mark 16: 9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven demons.

You are going to have to explain your problem here because I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Originally posted by AbRah2006

(3)Jesus said in Matthew 12:40 that he would be buried three days and three nights as Jonah was in the whale three days and three nights. Friday afternoon to early Sunday morning is only one and a half days!{/QUOTE]

Answer:There is a big difference between Hebrew speech in the first century and English speech in the 21st century.You fail to make allowance for the fact that in those times, nearly two thousand years ago, the Jews counted any part of a day as a whole day when computing any consecutive periods of time. As Jesus was laid in the tomb on the Friday afternoon, was there throughout the Saturday, and only rose sometime before dawn on the Sunday (the Sunday having officially started at sunset on the Saturday according to the Jewish calendar), there can be no doubt that he was in the tomb for a period of three days.

The expression three days and three nights is the sort of expression that we never, speaking English in the 21st century, use today. We must obviously therefore seek its meaning according to its use as a Hebrew colloquialism in the first century and are very likely to err if we judge or interpret it according to the language structure or figures of speech in a very different language in a much later age.

Furthermore we must also note that the figure of speech, as used in Hebrew, always had the same number of days and nights. Moses fasted forty days and forty nights (Exodus 24.18). Jonah was in the whale three days and three nights (Jonah 1.17). Job's friends sat with him seven days and seven nights (Job 2.13). We can see that no Jew would have spoken of "seven days and six nights" or "three days and two nights", even if this was the period he was describing. The colloquialism always spoke of an equal number of days and nights and, if a Jew wished to speak of a period of three days which covered only two nights, he would have to speak of three days and three nights. A fine example of this is found in the Book of Esther where the queen said that no one was to eat or drink for three days, night or day (Esther 4.16), but on the third day, when only two nights had passed, she went into the king's chamber and the fast was ended.

So we see quite plainly that "three days and three nights", in Jewish terminology, did not necessarily imply a full period of three actual days and three actual nights but was simply a colloquialism used to cover any part of the first and third days.

The important thing to note is that an equal number of days and nights were always spoken of, even if the actual nights were one less than the days referred to. As we do not use such figures of speech today we cannot pass hasty judgments on their meaning, nor can we force them to yield the natural interpretations that we would place on them.

There is conclusive proof in the Bible that when Jesus told the Jews he would be three days and three nights in the earth, they took this to mean that the fulfilment of the prophecy could be expected after only two nights. On the day after his crucifixion, that is, after only one night, they went to Pilate and said:

Sir, we remember how that impostor said, while he was still alive, 'After three days I will rise again'. Therefore order the sepulchre to be made secure until the third day.

Matthew 27.63-64.

We would understand the expression "after three days" to mean anytime on the fourth day but, according to the colloquialism, the Jews knew this referred to the third day and were not concerned to keep the tomb secured through three full nights but only until the third day after just too nights. Clearly, therefore, the expressions "three days and three nights" and "after three days" did not mean a full period of seventy-two hours as we would understand them, but any period of time covering a period of up to three days.

If someone told anyone of us on a Friday afternoon in these days that he would return to us after three days we would probably not expect him back before the following Tuesday at the earliest. The Jews, however, anxious to prevent any fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy were only concerned to have the tomb secured until the third day, that is, the Sunday, because they knew that the expressions "after three days" and "three days and three nights" were not to be taken literally but according to the figures of speech that they used in their times.

The important question is, not how we read such colloquialisms which have no place in our figures of speech today, but how the Jews read them according to the terminology of their times. It is very significant to note that when the disciples boldly claimed that Jesus had risen from the dead on the third day, that is, on the Sunday after only two nights had passed (e.g. Acts 10.40), no one ever attempted to counter this testimony as by claiming that three nights would have to pass before the prophecy could be deemed to be fulfilled. The Jews of those times knew their language well and it is only because some are ignorant of their manners of speech that they presumptuously attack the prophecy Jesus made, simply because he was not in the tomb for an actual three-day and three-night period of seventy-two hours. (This means that Jonah's sojourn in the fish also only covered a partial period of three days and was not necessarily three actual days and ni ghts either).

Originally posted by AbRah2006

(4)In Luke 23:43 Jesus said to the thief on the cross, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise." This obviously has to be false, for Jesus was supposed to lay dead in the tomb for three days following his crucifixion.

Answer:Jesus' soul went immediately to paradise, which is the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2-4), but His body went to the grave for 3 days.Jesus said on the cross, "Father, into Your hands I commit My Spirit" (Luke 23:46), which indicates His soul went to be with the Father in heaven the very instant He died.When Jesus said to Mary after His resurrection, "I have not yet ascended to My Father," He was referring to his body ascending into heaven 40 days after his resurrection (Acts 1), not to his to his soul going to heaven between death and resurrection.

Originally posted by AbRah2006

(5)Jesus commands the disciples to go into Galilee immediately after the resurrection. Matthew 28:10. Jesus commands the disciples to "tarry in Jerusalem" immediately after the resurrection.(Luke 24:49)

Answer:First, it is possible that the command was not given until after they had been in Galilee.In this event there would be no conflict whatsoever.Furthermore, the command to "tarry" simply meant to make Jerusalem their headquarters.It did not preclude taking short trips elsewhere.Jerusalem was the place they were to receive the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:49) and to being their work.

Originally posted by AbRah2006

(6)Jesus first appeared to the eleven disciples in a room at JerusalemLuke 24:33,36,37/ John 20:19. Jesus first appeared to the eleven on a mountain in Galilee Matt 28:16,17

Scriptures: Matthew: On a mountain in Galilee (60-100 miles away) (28:16-17)

Mark: To two in the country, to eleven "as they sat at meat" (16:12,14)

Luke: In Emmaus (about seven miles away) at evening, to the rest in a room in Jerusalem later that night. (24:31, 36)

John: In a room, at evening (20:19)

Answer:In a room at Jerusalem, as reported by Luke and John (and Mark). Matthew 28:16-20 is a later appearance.

Originally posted by AbRah2006

(7) The Bible contradicts itself by saying:(a) Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Acts 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree.

(b)Mark 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.

Question: How could Jesus die at two different places (the tree and the cross) at the same time?

Answer:The tree is the cross.The Romans made their crosses from trees.The Romans did not hang criminals from trees, except in exceptional cases.When they crucified, the Romans used some form of a cross—a platform that had a crossbar attached to the main vertical stake.By New Testament times the Romans were using several different cross forms for crucifixion.One was the so-called St. Anthony's cross, shaped like a T.Another was called the Latin cross in which a horizontal crossbar intersected the upright bean somewhere along it upper half.One of these two cross forms most likely was used for the execution of Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by AbRah2006

8. The Christians claim that Jesus was crucified for their sins but the Bible refutes their false claim by saying that Christians are sinless 1 John 3: 9,6,8

Answer:Jesus did die for our sins.John is not asserting sinless perfection (see 1:8-10) but explaining that the believer's life is characterized not by sin but by doing what is right.

Originally posted by AbRah2006

9. The Christians claim that Jesus was resurrected after he was crucified but the Bible refutes their claim by saying that there is to be no resurrection of the dead Job 7:9/ Eccl 9:5/ Is 26:14

Answer: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/norez.html

Originally posted by AbRah2006

10. Let us read this verse 'Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified. (Matthew 26:2)'. If anyone believes his prediction in Matt 26:2, then Jesus must have known of his upcoming crucifixion. As we all know that Christians claim that Jesus is God. If Jesus equals a god, then he could not have sacrificed his life, simply because an infinite god cannot die. If Jesus died as just a man, then he committed what we would today call suicide.

Answer:Yes, Jesus knew he would die and predicted his death.God did not die.The Son was separated from his source of life for three days.Jesus did not commit suicide.

Originally posted by AbRah2006

The contradictions of the Bible have invalidated the crucifixion of Jesus so the crucifixion of Jesus is a hoax!

Answer:Not in the least.As you can plainly see you have misinterpreted what the Bible is telling you.

[QUOTE= AbRah2006]

Conclusion: Jesus was not crucified for Allah the All-Merciful, the All-Compassionate had saved him :That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of God";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:- Nay, God raised him up unto Himself; and God is Exalted in Power, Wise;- And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them;- (Quran 4:157-158)

Answer:Jesus was crucified.Take a look at the evidence in Patty's thread on this subject.I think that 4:157-58 has been misinterpreted as I explained in Patty's thread and I might add that some modern Muslim scholars agree with me.

The "Gospel of Barnabas" that you speak of is a 15-16th forgery.Muslims have been warned to stay away from it.It contradicts the Qur'an.

The Muslim scholar Cyril Glassé states:

As regards the "Gospel of Barnabas" itself, there is no question that it is a medieval forgery.A complete Italian manuscript exists which appears to be a translation from a Spanish original (which exists in part), written to curry favor with Muslims of the time.It contains anachronisms which can date only from the Middle Ages and not before, and shows a garbled comprehension of Islamic doctrines, calling the Prophet "the Messiah", which Islam does not claim for him.Besides its farcical notion of sacred history, stylistically it is a mediocre parody of the Gospels, as the writings of Baha'Allah are of the Koran.

there is a clear example of this three days and nights business in 1 kings 12: 5, 12. king rehoboam tells the people to go away for three days in v. 5, to give him time to make up his mind about their request. this seems to indicate clearly that they are to come back on the fourth day. but when we look down to v. 12, we read that they came back the third day, as the king had appointed. but we would have said they had only been away two days.

different cultures have different ways of counting the days. look at the french. two weeks in france is "quinze jours", which means literally fifteen days, but in my country two weeks is only fourteen days

for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16

Yes, George, you are quite right in pointing out that the so-called "Gospel of Barnabas" has been proven to be a medieval forgery. I'm quite taken that anybody would dare to use that to support their arguments - sort of like using the DaVinci Code for theology.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.